Net neutrality on the ropes

Read the article this isnt partisan it effects ALL of us equally!!

Why You Should Be Freaking Out About The End Of Net Neutrality

At least that's the verdict of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which today struck down a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order from 2010 that forced Internet service providers (ISPs) like Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and Time Warner Cable to abide by the principles of network neutrality. These principles broadly stipulate that ISP network management must be transparent, and that ISPs can't engage in practices that block, stifle or discriminate against (lawful) websites or traffic types on the Internet.

1. No more net neutrality means ISPs can now discriminate against content they dislike.

I'm on the FCC's side here, and most people here will be, the counterpoint though is why Netflix and other large bandwidth users should be able to freeride the system.

they don't "ride for free"

the content they provide, which people want must reside on distributed servers for which they pay for the bandwidth and interconnection to the Net.

The issue is the cable and telcos used to be able to control people and bill for everything. When broadband arrived it was just people reading static web pages so no big deal. Now, there is lots of content that consumers are paying to receive and it ticks off the broadband providers.

Bear in mind, they are being compensated by the consumer so it's not like they are getting zero revenue.

The video content owners with their carriage requirements and retrans agreements drive up the price for traditional pay tv and consumers are shaving or cutting cords and going local digital off airs and over-the-top (OTT) for premium content. So, when you can't compete, or you see your business model failing due to innovation, then do the only logical thing; get your paid politicians to shut down competition or drive up costs so the consumer loses.

Cable has had no competition their rates go up persistently, if they want net neutrality then their "LOCK" on being the only provider in specific areas also needs to come to an end and open it up to competition and price pressures.
They want their cake and eat it too.

Cable has had no competition their rates go up persistently, if they want net neutrality then their "LOCK" on being the only provider in specific areas also needs to come to an end and open it up to competition and price pressures.
They want their cake and eat it too.

do not confuse Internet and pay TV. The carriage requirements by the content owners drives prices to where they are.

For example, a cable company cannot just carry ESPN standard definition. Nope, depending on how big they are, they must take the HD feeds, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNN, ESPN Classics and I beleive that ESPN must be on every package. So, maybe you pay $8 ( I can't reveal pricing) for all of ESPN and want to offer consumers a very basic cable package for $19.99. The first $8 goes to ESPN even though that consumer might only be getting the $19.99, ESPN gets their full $8 . The cable compnay is then left with $12 to pay the other content owners in that basic package and run their network/business.

Do you think Discovery doesn't do the same as ESPN? And so it goes

That's why you see Comcast buying content studios

In defense of content, for every tv show or movie you see there are exponentially more which may have gone to pilot but never got aired. The actors and staff all got paid and that money must come from somewhere.

Humans are interesting, we like to get stuff for free but always want to be paid for our own stuff

Uncle Ferd heard dey flog ya fer usin' the internet in Mooslamic countries...Report: Global Internet Continues to Become Less FreeNovember 14, 2016 | WASHINGTON — For the sixth year in a row, the global internet became less free as governments around the world re-doubled efforts to limit free expression, ban encryption technologies, and punish users for posting or sharing material deemed unacceptable by national authorities.

Those are just a few of the findings of the annual "Freedom on the Net" report published by Freedom House, a pro-democracy think tank in Washington D.C. Freedom House researchers now estimate that just over two-thirds of all internet users in the world live in nations that actively restrict online activity and where users face harsh penalties for their posts, including prison and whippings.

The survey of 65 nations determined that China, Iran, Syria and Ethiopia were the greatest abusers of internet freedoms, followed by Uzbekistan, Cuba, Vietnam and Saudi Arabia. Some nations, including North Korea which has a long record of flagrant human rights abuses, were not included. Among the nations that saw the biggest declines were Uganda, Bangladesh and Cambodia. Only 14 nations saw marginal improvements. Just three nations - China, India, and the U.S. - account for roughly 40 percent of all the world's online users.

Government restrictions

“No country is perfect,” said Adrian Shahbaz, research manager for Freedom on the Net. “We're trying to give a very nuanced evaluation of the problems that every country faces for upholding a free and open internet.” Among the factors of the best performing nations, Shahbaz said, were a free and open internet, very high levels of internet penetration, and strong protections for free speech and privacy. New cybersecurity laws in China were partly responsible for that nation's ranking as the worst abuser. Over the last several years, Beijing has made it a punishable offense to "spread rumors" or "endanger national security" online, and has severely cracked down on the use of VPN's to access thousands of blocked websites.

Freedom House researchers now estimate that just over two-thirds of all internet users in the world live in nations that actively restrict online activity.

Report authors also say governments are censoring a wider range of diverse content than ever before, depending on the priorities of the government. For example, Thailand metes out harsh punishments for "disrespect" of the Thai monarchy based on the one of the world's harshest lèse-majesté statutes, while many African and Middle East nations ban online content criticizing authorities or discussing LGBT issues. Satiric or light-hearted posts have also come under new levels of scrutiny. Images of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi with superimposed Mickey Mouse ears, and side-by-side photos comparing Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the character "Gollum" from the Lord of the Rings movies, landed those who created them, as well as those who shared them, time in jail.

Senate Votes to Restore Net Neutrality...US Senate Votes to Restore Net NeutralityMay 16, 2018 — The U.S. Senate voted 52-47 to overturn the FCC's 2017 repeal of Obama-era net neutrality rules, with all Democrats and three Republicans voting in favor of the measure.

The Senate approved a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution that would undo the Federal Communications Commission's vote to deregulate the broadband industry. If the CRA is approved by the House and signed by President Donald Trump, internet service providers would have to continue following rules that prohibit blocking, throttling and paid prioritization.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, accompanied by Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., right, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., second from left, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, left, speak to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 16, 2018, after the Senate passed a resolution to reverse the FCC decision to end net neutrality.

The Republican-controlled FCC voted in December to repeal the rules, which require internet service providers to give equal footing to all web traffic. Democrats argued that scrapping the rules would give ISPs free rein to suppress certain content or promote sites that pay them. Republicans insist they, too, believe in net neutrality, but want to safeguard it by crafting forward-looking legislation rather than reimposing an outdated regulatory structure.

'Political points'

"Democrats have decided to take the issue of net neutrality and make it partisan," Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota said. "Instead of working with Republicans to develop permanent net neutrality legislation, they've decided to try to score political points with a partisan resolution that would do nothing to permanently secure net neutrality." Before the vote, Senator Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, urged fellow senators to disregard the "armies of lobbyists marching the halls of Congress on behalf of big internet service providers." Lobbyists tried to convince senators that net neutrality rules aren't needed "because ISPs will self-regulate," and that blocking, throttling and paid prioritization are just hypothetical harms, Markey said.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai answers a question from a reporter after a meeting in which commissioners voted to end net neutrality, in Washington

Lobby groups representing all the major cable companies, telecoms and mobile carriers urged senators to reject the attempt to restore net neutrality rules. The resolution still faces tough odds in the House. It requires 218 votes to force a vote there, and only 160 House Democrats back the measure for now. The legislation would also require the signature of Trump, who has criticized the net neutrality rules. While Democrats recognize they are unlikely to reverse the FCC's rule, they see the issue as a key policy desire that energizes their base voters, a top priority ahead of the midterm elections.